How many knew vote ID laws were Constitutional

Supreme Court upholds voter ID law - politics - msnbc.com

Just curious how many knew that the Supreme Court ruled that Voter ID was Constitutional?

Indiana provides IDs free of charge to the poor and allows voters who lack photo ID to cast a provisional ballot and then show up within 10 days at their county courthouse to produce identification or otherwise attest to their identity.

Key:

Not key at all. But you keep believing that.

Oh, it absolutely is....it is unconstitutional to make people pay to vote.

The John Doe investigation into former aides of Governor Scott Walker is over. The Milwaukee County District Attorney says the governor will not face any charges. But the three year investigation did lead to charges against six people.

Governor Walker has been vindicated. Something he has been saying from the very beginning. A dark cloud hanging over his head is now gone.

Oh, it absolutely is....it is unconstitutional to make people pay to vote.

Good, so why are so many still complaining?

How are they being made to pay to vote?

if they have to pay for an ID it is tantamount to having to pay to vote.

Just curious how many knew that the Supreme Court ruled that Voter ID was Constitutional?

The right to vote is the fundamental right that has been the source of the most significant Supreme Court litigation. The Constitution addresses voting in Article II and four subsequent amendments (the 15th, forbidding discrimination in voting on the basis "of race, color, or previous condition of servitude;" the 19th, forbidding discrimination in voting based on sex; the 24th, prohibiting "any poll tax" on a person before they can vote; and the 26th, granting the right to vote to all citizens over the age of 18). The Court has chosen to also strictly scrutinize restrictions on voting other than those specifically prohibited by the Constitution because, in its words, the right to vote "is preservative of other basic civil and political rights."

Kramer v Union Free School District (1969) is an example of a case in which strict scrutiny resulted in the invalidation of a state voting restriction. The Court found for a bachelor living with his parents, who challenged a N.Y. law that limited voting in school board elections to persons who either owned or leased property in the district or had children attending schools in the district. The Court found the law was not sufficiently narrowly tailored to serve its interest of limiting voting to interested persons.

Reynolds v Sims (1964) considered a challenge to the malapportionment of the Alabama legislature. The Court invalidated Alabama's apportionment scheme, which gave voters in rural areas disproportionately more power (more representatives per capita) than urban voters. Writing for the Court, Chief Justice Warren declared, "Legislators represent people, not trees or acres," and that the "Equal Protection Clause requires that seats in both houses of a bicameral legislature must be apportioned on a population basis."

Fundamental Rights and Equal Protection Clause Analysis: The Right to Vote and the Right to Education

Good, so why are so many still complaining?

Takes a lot of the fraud out of elections.

[L]aw enforcement statistics, reports from elections officials and widespread research have proved that voter fraud at the polling place is virtually non-existent. The motivation for ginning up this bogeyman is often to intimidate certain groups of voters and, ultimately, make it harder for minority or disadvantaged groups to exercise their right to vote. It is no accident that these operations have repeatedly focused on minority communities.

Opinion: Voter fraud hysteria - Tova Andrea Wang - POLITICO.com

SEC. 302. PROVISIONAL VOTING AND VOTING INFORMATION REQUIREMENTS.
(a) PROVISIONAL VOTING REQUIREMENTS.

—If an individual declares that such individual is a registered voter in the jurisdiction
in which the individual desires to vote and that the individual
is eligible to vote in an election for Federal office, but the name
of the individual does not appear on the official list of eligible
voters for the polling place or an election official asserts that the
individual is not eligible to vote [due to no photo ID, for example], such individual shall be permitted to cast a provisional ballot…

http://www.eac.gov/assets/1/workflow...ng/Page/41.PDF

Not true. But you keep playing that game. By the way does that mean the EXISTING LAWS that require photo ID just to register are illegal?

Not true. But you keep playing that game. By the way does that mean the EXISTING LAWS that require photo ID just to register are illegal?

I think it is true.

But which states require voter ID but don't make a provision for someone to get a free ID if needed?

WASHINGTON -- An internal memo sent around the Wisconsin Department of Transportation went public this week, sparking controversy over its instructions that employees should not tell state residents they can receive free photo identification for voting unless they ask.

The memo in question, sent out by former Republican state Senate aide Steve Krieser, the executive assistant of the Department of Transportation, is causing backlash across the state because of legislation signed in May by Republican Gov. Scott Walker requiring voters to show valid photo ID when going to the polls.

Obtaining a state-issued photo ID for the purpose of voting is actually free of charge. But the catch is that voters have to be in the know: If they don't specifically ask for the free ID, they'll get charged $28. Krieser told The Huffington Post he has no plans to adjust the policy.

Even Rep. Evan Wynn (R-Whitewater), who voted for the voter ID law, told the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel that he found the internal memo troubling.